Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 470

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 86 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Modelling and mapping soil organic carbon stocks in Brazil

Open access
Gomes, Lucas Carvalho, Faria, Raiza Moniz, de Souza, Eliana, Veloso, Gustavo Vieira, Schaefer, Carlos Ernesto G.R., Filho, Elpídio Inácio Fernandes·2019·Geoderma
DOI 10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.01.007
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Brazil has extensive forests and savannas on deep weathered soils and plays a key role in the discussions about carbon sequestration, but the distribution of soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks up to 1 m depth has not been investigated in Brazil using machine learning techniques. In this study, we applied a methodological framework to optimize the prediction of SOC stocks for the entire Brazilian territory and determine how the environmental heterogeneity of Brazil influences the SOC stocks distribution. We used a legacy dataset of 8227 soil profiles which consisted of 37,693 samples. For each profile, the vertical distribution of SOC and bulk density were interpolated to standard depths (0–5, 5–15, 15–30, 30–60 and 60–100 cm) using mass preserving equal-area quadratic splines. The covariates database was composed of 74 variables including bioclimatic (temperature and precipitation) data, soil and biome maps, vegetation indexes and morphometric maps derived from a digital elevation model, with a 1 km spatial resolution. To obtain the best prediction performance, we tested four machine learning algorithms: Random Forests, Cubist, Generalized Linear Model Boosting and Support Vector Machines. Random Forests showed the best performance in predicting SOC stocks for all depths, with the highest performance at 30–60 cm for training (R2 = 0.32) and validation (R2 = 0.33); hence, it was selected for the spatial prediction of SOC stocks. The most important covariates selected by Random Forests using the recursive feature elimination were: soil class, sum of monthly mean temperature (SAMT), precipitation, slope height and vegetation indexes (NDVI, GPP). In total, Brazilian soils store approximately 71.3 PgC within the top 100 cm, where the first 0–30 cm contains almost 36 PgC. Approximately 31% of the total SOC stocks (22.2 PgC) occurs in protected areas (2.6 million km2), which are not subjected to land use pressure and carbon losses. Although the Amazon biome has the highest amount of stored SOC (36.1 PgC), its soils do not represent a good potential for carbon accumulation. Among soil classes, the Luvisols showed the lowest SOC density (6.45 kg m−2) and the Histosols presented the highest values (14.87 kg m−2). More than 57% of the total SOC was found in nutrient-poor, deep-weathered Ferralsols and Acrisols, which are the dominant soils in Brazil. The presented methodological framework covers all steps of prediction process, building maps with known accuracy and has great potential to be used in future soil carbon inventories at large scales. Concerning conservation issues, the results highlight the importance of nature reserves for protecting SOC in the long-term.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.01.007

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Metadata

Authors
Gomes, L. C., Faria, R. M., de Souza, E., Veloso, G. V., Schaefer, C. E. G. R., & Filho, E. I. F.
Venue
Geoderma
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-04
Volume
340
Pages
337-350
ISSN
0016-7061 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.01.007
OpenAlex
W2909736607
Cited by
470
References
86
FWCI
19.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.